All of it, not the comfortable half. Each one says where to go instead — a civic tool that says “not my area” and stops has refused twice.
- Whether a law applies to your situation.
- That depends on facts about you that a screen does not have, and getting it wrong costs somebody a deadline or a case.
- Instead: We explain what the text says and point you at it. For your situation, a lawyer — and legal aid exists.
- Anything about your body, your health or a medicine.
- Same reason as legal advice with higher stakes, and nobody in this organisation is qualified to give it.
- Instead: A doctor, a nurse or a pharmacist. If it is urgent, emergency services rather than a website.
- What to do with your money.
- Not our competence, and the incentive structures around financial advice are exactly what this project is sceptical of elsewhere.
- Instead: A fiduciary adviser, or a nonprofit financial counsellor.
- Who to vote for, or what to think about a candidate.
- The whole organisation's standing rests on not doing this. It is not caution — a non-partisan civic body that answers this question once has stopped being one.
- Instead: We show the record: what they said, what they did, what is documented, what is contested. You conclude.
- Anything outside civic material and literacy.
- An assistant that will discuss anything is one that will be confidently wrong about something serious at two in the morning, and this organisation cannot carry that.
- Instead: There are general assistants for that, and they are better at it than a civic tool pretending to be one.
